- From: Ian Davis <iand@internetalchemy.org>
- Date: Fri, 08 Jul 2005 11:14:56 +0100
- To: John McClure <jmcclure@hypergrove.com>
- CC: semantic-web@w3.org
On 07/07/2005 22:09, John McClure wrote: > > So, my task has been to "take apart" the RDF's predicate construct, > distinguishing between predicate verbs and predicate nouns. A predicate > verb is simply <has> while a predicate noun is (or could be) <Parent>. > So rather than <Person><hasParent rdf:resource='uri'/></Person>, I am > suggesting that the pattern <Person><has><Parent > rdf:about='uri'/></has></Person> be used instead. Many advantages are > apparent from this approach, while there appears to be few or > no disadvantages. I think it's perfectly acceptable to use nouns as predicates. In fact at [1] I proposed renaming some existing terms from the relationship schema [2] In your example above, you might write: <Person> <parent> <Person rdf about='uri'/> </parent> </Person> to be read as Person has parent 'Person with uri' However this naming isn't always possible, at least not without entering convulutions of syntax. For example how would foaf:knows be rewritten? Cheers, Ian [1] http://rdfweb.org/pipermail/rdfweb-dev/2004-March/012836.html [2] http://vocab.org/relationship/ -- http://internetalchemy.org | http://purl.org/NET/iand Working on... Silkworm <http://silkworm.talis.com/>
Received on Friday, 8 July 2005 10:15:01 UTC